Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    March 7, 2014 10:30pm-11:01pm PST

10:30 pm
the children are monthly outside. i'm encouraged by the point and the work that's been done about adding - >> ma'am, i'm sorry your time is up. >> next speaker >> good afternoon. i'm daniel wen beggar i live in ethic street that's adjacent our backyard our backyard is several doors down and wherein there are people in the backyard taven we hear them unless it's calm i've been there when it's been calm the problem is on the device when there are a lot of people back there. that's sort of of the atmosphere
10:31 pm
they're drinking and it gets loud and they mention several other restaurants this is not a restaurant this is a bar so it doesn't get the same sort of drinking and amplification and people yelling over each other. i have definite concerns that it's going to be used more. there are certain times like football games and baseball games you'll hear noise from the backyard even with the door closed. i'm hesitant to say this is a good idea considering this is the only place that the noise come from >> any further public comment. >> good afternoon. i'm pat i'm a neighbor i live on the corner
10:32 pm
of diamond and elizabeth. i've lived there since 84 or 85 that is the one place my wife likes to go we talk about open space and importance there are issues they need to do acoustics but that is the one place they feel comfortable going to. this is a great opportunity to encourage open space. we live in a noisy neighborhood i moved in before the controls went in on the restaurants i watched that whole thing happen we're trying to encourage people who are responsible but they need acoustical work but you can't stand beyond that i hope you approve it >> any further public comment seeing none, public comment is closed.
10:33 pm
commissioner moore >> i think it's refreshing s to hear a large number of people speaking in support of this issue i have question for mr. hogan. i'm wondering how you're thinking of providing access to people who are mobility impaired you have open space into the gasped and i assume if you were walking a cane are you planning moveable ramps i assume everyone wants to be back there >> the bar is cast we did have a cast certificate for handicapped they exempted the levels because of the stairs.
10:34 pm
there's two or three levels but we were certified as handicapped assessable with exemptions to those areas >> you're not going - >> if i'm asked to you certainly will. >> i see where the code doesn't apply just have a ramp and allow someone the opportunity to be able to be outside that kind of thing. >> till when i was asked when we had a lot of lawsuits going on i'm willing to do whatever. >> that will address the exit of any neighborhood and we're not trying to put the a.d. enforcement on this thing that would be a nice thing to do. >> commissioner sugaya.
10:35 pm
>> oh, yes. i said to acknowledge randell knox he was a former commissioner at the board of appeals in the destroying - sfoifks were that the introduction of the new conditions i assume you're asking us to incorporate the things in red under the condition part and i was concerned a lot about the long wall on the adjacent building which i think it being taken care of of with acoustic materials the block wall is that part of the building that's adjacent shall be covered one hundred percent with acoustical
10:36 pm
material. i don't know if you can put stuff open the adjacent building because you don't own it >> it's an automobile shop we have access to that. >> it applies to a property adjacent so i'm not sure that's enforceable from our standpoint it, it's a good thing to do you also have a separate agreement with the neighborhood; is that correct. >> that's correct. >> i guess with that i'll go ahead and make a motion to approve with the conditions including the additional conditions that were passed up by staff and to make note that condition - which one is it - condition 3 under enjoys the
10:37 pm
eastern concreteblas block wall we have to note that's on a adjacent property you don't know i don't think that's enforceable. >> we can't make that we can encourage it but not make it a condition. >> it's not part of the motion but an understanding that the project sponsor will we're encouraging him to implement that particular condition. that's my motion >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm also very supportive in this same vein we're encouraging item 3 we don't have control over the conditioning and i
10:38 pm
agree with commissioner moore they work with the accessibility sequences and put temporary ramps that will be a good thing for the future to allow everyone to enjoy the patio so you would a great place i'd love to come to the st. patrick's mass and go for a beer. >> there's a motion and a second to approve the conditions as assassinated striking 3 commissioners, on that motion commissioner antonini. commissioner borden. commissioner hillis. contra. commissioner sugaya. commissioner fung. commission president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero (clapping)
10:39 pm
commissioners that will now place you under our discretionary review. excuse me. if the audience could leave the chambers goally we have additional items on the agenda to attend to. that puts you under 11 a and d at the 36 street a request for a discretionary review and a request for variances >> good afternoon, commissioners michael smith with planning commission staff you have a request for a discretionary review at 660021st street between church and sanchez within the delores heights neighborhood. the property contains 4 existing
10:40 pm
structures a single-family residence located on the west side and a green structure located to the east of the residence that's connected by a breezeway to remove the two structures at the front and reconstruct a grammar. the primary structure will be replaced and there's a minimal increase on the west side of the building and there's an addition to the front of the building towards the street. the promise has been determined by the department at an mount to demolition but it has a value greater than the land structure use for a single-family dwelling. it requires variances from the
10:41 pm
planning code for set back and pursuant to sections one hundred 32, 34 of the planning code. the dr is requested by the neighborhood to the west on twithd street. the dr requesters concerned are one the project would upset the historical development and it will impede the property view and the property will remove landscaping and for the project doesn't take into account the development on adjacent properties and 57 the sequa review is not acknowledged that is lot has a 20 percent slope. in response to issue one the project is consistent with the development on the lot bus it
10:42 pm
maintains the low profile structure. response to issue two the property is located within the delores su d which is the few su d that is protecting views, however, it's enforced applicable to height and inquired limits. the current view over this property is not protected. issue to 4 the landscaping has already been removed it was done by a local architect and was removed by the city before the review. and it take into account the adjacent buildings by the sloping nature that's well below the envelope and issue 5 for the
10:43 pm
environmental staff went back and verified against the department resources that the site didn't have a 20 percent slope. so for those reasons the department is recommending not to take dr. since the materials were transmitted to the commission staff has received additional neighborhood correspondence this includes correspondence from 26 neighbors who have concerns. the neighbors were on 21st and hill street and this include the letter from someone representing the delores heights club. that concludes my presentation if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> thank you. dr requester you have 5 minutes. >> 5 minutes. i have 5 minutes and the other will people have 3 >> just to be clear the dr team
10:44 pm
get a total of 5 minutes and people in support of the dr get 5 minutes. >> i will talk face. this the the third hearing in a row effecting castro delores heights and noah valley. this is the part in between that's up how that has it's on conditions on it. here is the neighborhood. delores heights please put the calendar up. put it up. sue >> here's the neighborhood here's the dr requester this is the property her hits hill it's a steep hill. and that is the delores heights control. this is in your packet as inhabit 2 to barkley street this
10:45 pm
is the rear yard and this doesn't show the garage in the front yard but all 3 parts of this. that is the project. this is the only drawing 3-d drawing we've had a up until the packet it shows the slope of the hill it shows slope on the property. this is a very rough sketch. the repair residents this is the christmas tree house fair and we have the other 3-d view that's also in your packet. this is the house and there's no information role of the context. the context is really important for this ear. what you have here in your plans this is g one 10 is you see the
10:46 pm
paris residence her and the christmas tree house there and 3650 and this is 3656 this is the rear yard of the residence. this is everyone slopes do you think that's itself nature of the area. the other thing that you are missing in all of this is a sense of how important this is for the public. it is more important than just this repair this is part of what it's talking about. this is what the public sows. because the owner has chosen to develop the entire part of the property front to back he's asking to tear out this and rebuild the rear of the house hose asking to rebuild this in
10:47 pm
delores heights your required to have a rear yard and asking to build her and two stories here. what should be the trade off is a public view over the site should be protected for all of that development. we're proposing that the deck outside the pair residence the elevated level come out no one uses decks in this area. we also ask they protect the views for the public. one through one minute and 3 seconds go >> all right. >> i'm party part owner of 3666 it's been in my family for years. a quick question one minute and
10:48 pm
13 seconds total we're denying this project for a variety you have reasons we don't want them to build in sections of the property. this is the old house right here they want to put the revolver deck her that's interfering with our privacy and our light and views we've asked the deck to be removed. the first time we've met them they've never take to out. also this area they're adding a lot here from the fence line to fence line. we're looking at a wall on the whole side of our house we don't get a break from the wall most people get a break ambassador we
10:49 pm
want some consideration for the public view and to drop this down to a more reasonable height >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay speakers in support the requester has one card. >> wendy reside on 21st street i'm an attorney in the city and active in the community the president of lake merced golf club i've bought the property because of the views and i'll put this up in a moment this is a taste full design for the property. if you'll take into account the tape photo that's from my upstairs home and you'll see
10:50 pm
there's an area right here that's a one story greenhouse that's supposed to be removed and that building is supposed to come up to the top of the story tower moving that tower 7 feet to the eastern side. that's what you view you're not seeing a lot of view indicators a lot of the public walk upside down the street you see the views of downtown san francisco. on the bottom you see the architect site photograph of that area it looks like a large corridor but this is going to come over to here because of the change. one of the concerns is the moving of the building so far from the eastern wall. and there's a concern the
10:51 pm
building is going up to the top of the tower so you're losing views there and nothing in the plans has provided to there's a suggestion of lead solar panels are going to be put in and i'm concerned about project creep on this project. i've had discussions with my the purchaser about vegetation in this area calling for the planning department of a tree those are negotiable i want to keep those views for the public and myself walking down the street. they're put on a new project and filmed on this from sanchez to church it's a great corridor and very, very popular for tourism
10:52 pm
in the city >> thank you. any further speakers. >> my name is a arne i'm an architect i was hired by the dr requesters to help them interpret the plan. >> excuse me. if you're a party to the requester you're a party to the team you have to speak under the team time that's an additional 5 minutes. >> we only have 5 minutes for the architect and the attorney. >> commissioners rules and regulations allow for the dr requests amend team and the dr team to make their presentation. >> i can't talk at all he can't explain. >> it's in the rules it's the last - >> you suggest the rules are ridiculous.
10:53 pm
>> okay. >> next speaker. >> hi. i'm going to show you a video i'm melissa i'm married to aaron - okay basically, i'm having technical difficulty but i have the public assess views hooits that's all set up to go somehow it's not working right now. these views -
10:54 pm
>> if that's true technically under the rules our part of the technical team. >> hi, i'm tom, i live on sanchez street about a block and a half of their house. i've been going to all thoseometers for the last i know 5 to seven years to all the buildings being built if tlolz heights. >> excuse me. >> show the film. >> this is his 3 minutes does
10:55 pm
he want to speak or show the film i can't override the man's right to speak. >> are you talking to me. show it >> okay. this is getting out of control. (laughter) outlook please continue to speak. >> can i talk. okay. i've gone to a lot of meetings and the one for this house was actually, the first house in probably 5 years to see what was going on in the neighborhood and this one was five or six blocks away upside down hills making it difficult for older people it would have been done better if
10:56 pm
it was done on the property so you could look and see what was going on with the property. what was going to happen to it. as soon as i walked in the meeting i say there was a deck on the side no architect would go build a deck looking into someone's kitchen i thought that was the bargaining chip for the architect. when i started asking dimensions from the properties on each side of the elevations i was trying to figure out where their house was they said it was approximate i didn't get a location of the windows. the place has already got a deck i think of where i live i can
10:57 pm
see a lot of rooftop decks and what the fighting for rooftop decks this year probably 99 percent of the time never used except for fireworks downtown. they could be building or put pot trees or whoever owns the building next time. i cannot get a lot of information that i would have preferred to get to make an kathy decision. i want to see them take that roof-deck off >> thank you. other public speakers in support of the dr requester.
10:58 pm
>> good afternoon. my name is mr. perry are a i own the proposed at the 2666 directly to next to 3660. it was requested - >> sir. >> sir. >> and the privacy and light be taken away and open doors to build even higher the rooftop decks proposed by mr. cox will be a controversial issue as more hoefrmdz privacy a stolen and the 0 acoustics diminished. so a small group of people have the right to take away that go
10:59 pm
to place that's been a place for visitors if not to all. over thirty years ago this exact property prompted the neighborhood to ban together to halt a red building and there was a reason why the special strict was created. my mother and neighborhood audry led the fight for this special use district. the bench at the top of the hill commemorates the work and is a reminderer of the special use district. here we are today facing the same fight ero over the same property do with you abide by the policy created over thirty years ago or
11:00 pm
allow this new generation of billionaires to carve on. neighborhoods are upset that mr. cox tore out a legendary garden a legendary garden 411 am i done >> you have 24 seconds. >> for years it was part of the open day garden towers and many letters from neighbors show 0 the variances that will erode the special uses of the district and